Latest news with #smokedamage
CTV News
6 days ago
- General
- CTV News
No injuries in fire at southeast Calgary building
The Calgary Fire Department was called to a fire in the Foothills Industrial Park at about 9:40 p.m. on July 14, 2025. The Calgary Fire Department is investigating after a late evening fire in the Foothills Industrial Park. At about 9:40 p.m., officials say a fire broke out at 3347 57 Ave. S.E. It was brought under control less than an hour later, but there was heavy smoke damage throughout the building. No one was hurt in the fire. Anyone with information, especially photos and video of the fire before CFD's arrival, is asked to contact piofire@
BBC News
10-07-2025
- General
- BBC News
Fire damage at City Chambers being assessed
A clean-up operation is under way at Glasgow City Chambers after a fire broke out late on Wednesday electrical fire on the second floor canteen occurred about 22:00, and firefighters were at the building for around three hours to contain it. A spokesperson for the local authority said there had been smoke damage as a result, and the impact of smoke and water on the upper floors was being assessed. There were no casualties or injuries in the incident. The building is open, but some areas are not accessible while the clean-up is carried out. The fire service said four appliances and an aerial platform were sent to the council building at George Square and were there from 22:00 to 01:00.
CBS News
02-07-2025
- Health
- CBS News
California moves to set nation's first smoke damage insurance standard
One of the most common insurance complaints after a fire comes from people whose homes are still standing but covered in potentially toxic soot. Because there is no state or federal standard for smoke damage, insurance companies often refuse to pay for cleanup, leaving victims on the hook for expensive remediation and testing. Well, that may finally be about to change. The California Department of Insurance has commissioned a task force to develop a first-in-the-nation smoke damage standard that could be the blueprint for a national standard. The team will set the guidelines for insurance coverage and the clean-up of smoke-damaged homes. On July 1, the state announced the task force members, many of whom we had interviewed for our ongoing insurance investigation. The task force includes high-profile insurance consumer advocate Amy Bach and Deputy Insurance Commissioner Tony Cignarale, along with public health experts, smoke remediation specialists, and representatives from the insurance industry. Insurers often deny smoke damage claims unless you can prove there is permanent physical damage from smoke. But health experts warn that smoke damage can be invisible to the naked eye, leaving behind toxic levels of chemicals and heavy metals that may require expensive remediation to make the home safe to live in. We recently sat down to discuss the issue with California Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara. "There's no real set standards around these issues... You know what is the worst part of that? People come up to me and say, 'I don't know what's worse, and I almost feel guilty saying this, but I almost prefer that my house was a total loss' [instead of] having to deal with this smoke-claim issue," Lara told CBS News California. "That's horrible because there are no set standards for how you mitigate your home against wildfire smoke. And who benefits here? The insurance company." Once this standard is set, it will finally help solidify how insurers must cover smoke damage and how much remediation they must provide. Aside from Bach and Cignarale, the rest of the task force includes: Assistant State Public Health Officer Dr. Rita Nguyen Los Angeles County Chief Medical Advisor Dr. Nichole Quick Chief Frank Bigelow, Cal Fire's deputy director for community wildfire preparedness and mitigation We'll be following up on their work as we continue investigating California's insurance crisis.
Washington Post
27-06-2025
- Business
- Washington Post
California court rules state insurance policy on smoke damage is unlawful
A California judge has ruled the state's bare-bones home insurance program's handling of smoke damage claims is unlawful, a decision that could have wide-ranging implications as insurers increasingly deal with the aftermath of wildfires. Home insurance broadly covers fire damage, but there is a growing dispute over what damage must be covered when flames don't torch the property. The decision Tuesday by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Stuart M. Rice is a victory for homeowners in a state where the risk of catastrophic wildfires has intensified alongside a brewing home insurance crisis. The specific case involved Jay Aliff, who sued in 2021 over the insurance payout for his house near Lake Tahoe, which was damaged in the November 2020 Mountain View fire. His lawsuit challenged the California Fair Access to Insurance Requirements Plan, or the FAIR Plan, the state's high-risk insurance pool or the last-resort option for those dropped by private insurance companies. With high premiums and basic coverage, the FAIR Plan was designed as a temporary safety net until policyholders could find a more permanent option. Today, it has become the default option for many, with the number of residential policies reaching 550,000 in March, more than double from 2020, state data shows. Reports from other urban wildfires , in which building materials, appliances, cars and more burn at incredibly high temperatures, show increased levels of heavy metals including lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) such as benzene that are tied to negative health risks. But insurance companies haven't standardized testing for those contaminants. The FAIR Plan has been scrutinized for years over allegations of summarily denying smoke damage claims unless there's proof of permanent physical change, even though the California Department of Insurance has long determined that that threshold is illegal. Aliff's lawsuit claims that FAIR Plan at the time offered a fraction of the money he expected to cover the costs to remediate the damages, citing a partial denial letter that said the fire debris could be cleaned up –- and therefore didn't qualify for coverage as a 'direct physical loss' to the home. 'The things that burn are terrifying like lead, cyanide. It's not possible to get that out with Swiffer,' said Aliff's attorney, Dylan Schaffer, referring to the brand of disposable mops. Schaffer, who is also the attorney in a number of other lawsuits against the FAIR Plan related to the smoke damage issue, said the new court ruling was a game-changer in California insurance law at a time when thousands of homeowners in the recent Palisades and Eaton wildfires are still fighting for coverage. 'It is the most important decision in California insurance law in decades,' Schaffer said. 'It draws a line in the sand as it relates to where carriers can start carving out their liability and avoiding liability.' The ruling said the way the FAIR Plan limits smoke damage coverage to its definition of 'direct physical loss' was a violation of the law, stating that 'this language limits coverage reasonably expected by an insured in a manner which is not conspicuous, plain and clear.' The judge also said it was unlawful that the FAIR Plan required smoke damage to be 'visible to the unaided human eye' or capable of being 'detected by the unaided human nose of an average person' rather than 'the subjective senses of (the insured) or by laboratory testing.' 'Being unable to resort to their own senses or laboratory tests, it is entirely unclear how an insured could determine whether a particular loss is covered or not,' the court decision noted. FAIR Plan spokeswoman Hilary McLean said in a statement that the insurer has been working with the state insurance agency to update its policy language and has already eliminated the so-called sight and smell test. 'Our goal is to continue providing fair and reasonable coverage for wildfire-related losses while maintaining the financial integrity of the FAIR Plan for all policyholders,' McLean said in a statement.
Associated Press
27-06-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
California court rules state insurance policy on smoke damage is unlawful
A California judge has ruled the state's bare-bones home insurance program's handling of smoke damage claims is unlawful, a decision that could have wide-ranging implications as insurers increasingly deal with the aftermath of wildfires. Home insurance broadly covers fire damage, but there is a growing dispute over what damage must be covered when flames don't torch the property. The decision Tuesday by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Stuart M. Rice is a victory for homeowners in a state where the risk of catastrophic wildfires has intensified alongside a brewing home insurance crisis. The specific case involved Jay Aliff, who sued in 2021 over the insurance payout for his house near Lake Tahoe, which was damaged in the November 2020 Mountain View fire. His lawsuit challenged the California Fair Access to Insurance Requirements Plan, or the FAIR Plan, the state's high-risk insurance pool or the last-resort option for those dropped by private insurance companies. With high premiums and basic coverage, the FAIR Plan was designed as a temporary safety net until policyholders could find a more permanent option. Today, it has become the default option for many, with the number of residential policies reaching 550,000 in March, more than double from 2020, state data shows. Reports from other urban wildfires, in which building materials, appliances, cars and more burn at incredibly high temperatures, show increased levels of heavy metals including lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) such as benzene that are tied to negative health risks. But insurance companies haven't standardized testing for those contaminants. The FAIR Plan has been scrutinized for years over allegations of summarily denying smoke damage claims unless there's proof of permanent physical change, even though the California Department of Insurance has long determined that that threshold is illegal. Aliff's lawsuit claims that FAIR Plan at the time offered a fraction of the money he expected to cover the costs to remediate the damages, citing a partial denial letter that said the fire debris could be cleaned up –- and therefore didn't qualify for coverage as a 'direct physical loss' to the home. 'The things that burn are terrifying like lead, cyanide. It's not possible to get that out with Swiffer,' said Aliff's attorney, Dylan Schaffer, referring to the brand of disposable mops. Schaffer, who is also the attorney in a number of other lawsuits against the FAIR Plan related to the smoke damage issue, said the new court ruling was a game-changer in California insurance law at a time when thousands of homeowners in the recent Palisades and Eaton wildfires are still fighting for coverage. 'It is the most important decision in California insurance law in decades,' Schaffer said. 'It draws a line in the sand as it relates to where carriers can start carving out their liability and avoiding liability.' The ruling said the way the FAIR Plan limits smoke damage coverage to its definition of 'direct physical loss' was a violation of the law, stating that 'this language limits coverage reasonably expected by an insured in a manner which is not conspicuous, plain and clear.' The judge also said it was unlawful that the FAIR Plan required smoke damage to be 'visible to the unaided human eye' or capable of being 'detected by the unaided human nose of an average person' rather than 'the subjective senses of (the insured) or by laboratory testing.' 'Being unable to resort to their own senses or laboratory tests, it is entirely unclear how an insured could determine whether a particular loss is covered or not,' the court decision noted. FAIR Plan spokeswoman Hilary McLean said in a statement that the insurer has been working with the state insurance agency to update its policy language and has already eliminated the so-called sight and smell test. 'Our goal is to continue providing fair and reasonable coverage for wildfire-related losses while maintaining the financial integrity of the FAIR Plan for all policyholders,' McLean said in a statement.
